So a bunch of fornicating priests and their mistresses are moaning that they can't get married. Boo-hoo! Well, they have several options. Repentance, laicizing,or joining another religion are the ones that come to mind. Or they can start a new sect and get married like Marty, John, and Huldrich did. It just goes to show you: bad Catholics become "good Protestants by sinning!

I wonder if Catholic priests who've taken a vow of celibacy also know that the Magisterium declares that masturbation is a grave sin via the Catechism?

Would the Roman Catholic clergy who are wrestling with celibacy have an easier time of dealing with their celibacy if masturbation wasn't a grave sin?

If there was a private, anonymous poll taken of Catholic clergy asking them if they masturbated after they became priests, I wonder what percentage of priests would say they masturbate. I don't think it would be 0%.

And then a follow-up question would be: "If you answered yes, that you masturbated since becoming a priest, have you confessed your sin to another priest in the sacrament of penance?"

And then a follow-up question would be: "If you answered yes, that you masturbated since becoming a priest, have you confessed your sin to another priest in the sacrament of penance?"

I wonder what percentage of Catholic priests who acknowledge masturbating will then say that they've confessed their grave sin of masturbation to another priest. I don't think the percentage would be 100%.

Obviously, the expected RCC standard is that Catholic priests are to be celibate and to also not masturbate.

But if that standard is not met, which of the following choices would you choose:

(A) Pedophilic priest sex.(B) Gay priest sex.(C) Fornicating priest sex.(D) Masturbating priests.(E) None of the above. Any of the priests who do A-D should resign their priesthood, and if they don't resign, they are removed from office by their superior.

I assume (A)-(C) is unacceptable. So if you had to choose on behalf of all Catholic laity everywhere whereby the Catholic priests are collectively having a difficult time being celibate and simultaneously not masturbating such that the problem has become both scandalous and expensive, and you had to choose between (D) masturbating priests or (E) removing all priests from office who aren't celibate and/or who periodically masturbate, which would you choose?

I would guess that you all would pick (D), have masturbating priests.

On a related note, what if the RCC had a considerable number of priests who masturbated and yet didn't think that masturbation was a grave sin or who didn't think that masturbation was a sin that they had to confess to another priest.

It might be a significant factor in the problem. Although you or others might discount the following because it's coming from a former Catholic priest, he does offer his perceptions from his days in Catholic school:

"Many priests tell themselves that if it isn't vaginal sex, then it's still celibacy. This is a perfect example of the "what's the least amount I have to do to meet the prescriptions of church law?" morality, which is widespread among Catholics.

The church trains its children to compartmentalize sex, into distinct acts, from the very beginning, with only one act, unitive and procreative vaginal sex between a man and a woman, who are married to each other, considered holy.

Catholics have all sorts of ways of dealing with this. I had a Catholic friend in college, who vowed she would be a virgin until she got married, but she blew most of the guys in the theatre department.

In seminary, I believed I was still a virgin, because I had never had sex with woman. Men didn't count, so the fooling around I did in college ...

I learned that celibacy also involved chastity, which meant no masturbation. Of course, I did masturbate, but prayerfully, thinking about communion with god.

All Catholics are called to chastity, and I would venture to guess that 99% of them don't live chastely. They masturbate alone or with their opposite sex spouses.

There are such guilty, fearful, and grandiose expectations placed upon the sexual act in Catholic moral teachings. Few Catholics can live up to these prescriptions; therefore, people develop ways of rationalizing their behavior, so that they can meet the church's unachievable sexual sainthood.

It is no shock that pedophile-priests would not consider raping children, and the lesser sin of groping a child, a violation of celibacy. The system of Catholic sexual ethics sowed the seeds of their distortion and their crimes long ago."

"Some pedophile priests believe molesting children does not breach their vow of celibacy, a retired Australian Catholic bishop said in a magazine interview. Geoffrey Robinson, former auxiliary bishop of Sydney, told The Australian Women's Weekly he had made the observation during years of work with victims of child abuse within the church. "We've met it often enough to see it as a factor. That's what the vow of celibacy refers to, being married. If it's not an adult woman, then somehow they're not breaking their vow," the 72-year-old said."

"Look again at the title of this post: "As If The Pope didn't Have Enough To Deal With..."

Then you introduced masturbation into the debate. Since masturbation is a moral issue (excused or inexcusable) and I am asking whether or not you masturbate and whether or not you think it is ok to do so. You should not attempt to run away from an issue you raised; being Protestant is not a shield against moral scrutiny. At a minimum, you should be able to say whether or not you think masturbation is morally neutral or acceptable.

This post is about Catholic sexual ethics/dogma and practice, please respond to the following:

Might the Roman Catholic clergy who are wrestling with celibacy have an easier time of dealing with celibacy if masturbation wasn't a grave sin?

Obviously, the expected RCC standard is that Catholic priests are to be celibate and to also not masturbate.

But if that standard is not met, which of the following choices would you choose:

(A) Pedophilic priest sex.(B) Gay priest sex.(C) Fornicating priest sex.(D) Masturbating priests.(E) None of the above. Any of the priests who do A-D should resign their priesthood, and if they don't resign, they are removed from office by their superior.

"Might the Roman Catholic clergy who are wrestling with celibacy have an easier time of dealing with celibacy if masturbation wasn't a grave sin?"

Dozie: No

"But if that standard is not met, which of the following choices would you choose:

(A) Pedophilic priest sex.(B) Gay priest sex.(C) Fornicating priest sex.(D) Masturbating priests.(E) None of the above. Any of the priests who do A-D should resign their priesthood, and if they don't resign, they are removed from office by their superior."

Dozie: E - A prist who has difficulty keeping his priestly vow should seek spiritual direction to discern his place or otherwise in the priesthood.

Now, can you answer my questions: Do you masturbate? Have you ever masturbated? Do married Protestants masturbate? Is it ok (not sinful) to masturbate?

James Swan lists several media articles about the Catholic celibacy rule and how a number of Catholic priests have a difficult time with celibacy, either as pedophiles, homosexual sex, or fornicators.

Hence, there have been polls showing that a majority of Catholic laity believe that the celibacy rule should be waived or overturned.

These Catholic laity respondents, while recognizing that there are a number of celibate priests who don't masturbate, might possibly think that the expensive and scandalous problems caused by priests might be attributable to the celibacy rule.

Yet again, might the Roman Catholic clergy who are wrestling with celibacy have an easier time of dealing with celibacy if masturbation wasn't a grave sin?

Obviously, the expected RCC standard is that Catholic priests are to be celibate and to also not masturbate.

But if that standard is not met, which of the following choices would you choose:

(A) Pedophilic priest sex.(B) Gay priest sex.(C) Fornicating priest sex.(D) Masturbating priests.(E) None of the above. Any of the priests who do A-D should resign their priesthood, and if they don't resign, they are removed from office by their superior.

What Protestants do or what Protestant teaching is on the subject of masturbation is not the issue. Catholics generally don't care what Protestants think anyways.

For example, Protestants can or will cite Protestant scholars in favor of the Protestant canon. But this is usually ignored by Catholics. So then Protestants will cite the Church Fathers in order to gain some traction in their arguments with Catholics. I.e., Protestants generally have to debate Catholics on Catholic terms.

It's the same here. Catholic dogma and practice is under the microscope here. Not Protestant. While I can understand the motivation of your tu quoque arguments, they are neither here, nor there. We are discussing Catholic dogma.

"Dozie: E - A priest who has difficulty keeping his priestly vow should seek spiritual direction to discern his place or otherwise in the priesthood."

That's an understandable selection of the available choices.

Why do you think the RCC hierarchy not remove so many of the priests who've violated their vows of celibacy?

Given that you think priests who periodically masturbate should consider whether they should continue in office, if just half of these masturbating priests leave office, what do you think it will do to the existing shortage of Catholic priests?

"Catholic dogma and practice is under the microscope here. Not Protestant".

Have you wondered why it is only the Catholic Church that is ever scrutinized? Have you noticed that Catholics have no problems stating what their church teaches on particular issues? I am asking you simple questions on an issue you raised yet you do not seem to have the courage to answer. What is the cost of answering?

Truth, are you serious, quoting an apostate priest as an authority, one who is a gay too? That's like quoting Jack the Ripper as an authority on surgery!

I also find it weird that you and serveral other persons think allowing priests to get married or to masturbate would relieve sexual tensions, so to prevent sodomy and child molestation. Not so! Study after study shows most child molesters are married men. Sexually disfunctional people come from sexually disfunctional families or they were abused by a friend of the family. In other words, it was the marriage of one or two maladjusted persons that produced this kind of tragedy. And it happens across the board in all religios and ethnic groups. So, the solution is repentance, Truth, not getting married in a vain attempt to show, hey I'm not queer, (a lot of sodomites do it) or to mastubate to "relieve" sexual tensions. (That doesn't work either. Don't you know most sodomites are compulsive masturbators?)

"Have you wondered why it is only the Catholic Church that is ever scrutinized?"

No.

"Have you noticed that Catholics have no problems stating what their church teaches on particular issues?"

I have noticed that Catholics will give conflicting, and sometimes even contradicting answers on what their church teaches on particular issues.

Catholics, Protestants, Eastern Orthodox, and many other non-Catholics have seen this and know this. Even you should know this.

For example, Catholics disagree on the teachings from Vatican II.

With regards to the issue of some/many Catholic priests breaking their vows of celibacy and it becoming both terribly scandalous and expensive for the Roman Catholic Church, not to mention spiritually damaging to the Catholic flock, here are a list of choices:

(a) Do nothing. The current Church teaching on priest practice and discipline is sufficient.

(c) Keep the celibacy rule. Have a near zero-tolerance policy on priests who engage in pedophilia, who engage in homosexual sex, and who fornicate. Remove them from office. Allow women to become priests to alleviate the shortage of priests.

(d) Permit priests to periodically masturbate without feeling or knowing that they are committing a grave sin. The flexing of Catholic dogma on this issue is done with the purpose that such flexibility might douse the sexual fire of some/many priests who might otherwise commit pedophilia, gay sex, or fornicate.

Dozie (and anyone else), what choice would you pick above? Would you pick (a), do nothing? Hope it all goes away, and it's just a temporary thing? How about (d)? Think that might help. Or do you have your own ideas? Knowing that any suggestion you have will introduce other downstream challenges.

Anyways, with regards to (d), it might be helpful to conduct a large private, anonymous poll of Catholic clergy asking them if they masturbated after they became priests.

And a follow-up question might be: "If you answered yes, that you have masturbated since becoming a priest, have you confessed your sin to another priest in the sacrament of penance?"

And there'd be other questions on the survey to assess priest's beliefs and conduct on sexual matters.

The survey might show that less than 5% of priests masturbate. And that those who masturbate, none of them, or very few of them, engage in pedophilia, gay sex, or fornicate. This would be helpful to know.

Or the survey might show that over 85% of priests masturbate. And of the priests who masturbate, almost all of them don't confess their grave sin to another priest. This would be helpful to know.

Or ask them a survey question if they think periodic masturbating will help them and other priests to maintain celibacy if such masturbating could be done without it being guilt-laden. Finding out what percentage of priests believe that would be helpful.

There's all sorts of potentially helpful information that can be gleaned from polling priests on an intelligently-designed, wide-scale survey on masturbation and other sexual questions.

"The answer of what I or other Protestants do or teach is irrelevant to the topic of Catholic sexual ethics."

I suppose there is little hope you will ever address questions on an issue you are very interested in. The lesson for you, though, is that next time before you start throwing stones at others you should consider if you are able to handle one or two thrown at you. We have watched you do your gymnastics instead of being man enough to the questions. The questions have become for you an opportunity to play games and not being as truthful as you should be.

And, why are you interested in Catholic sexual ethics in the first place? How do Catholic sexual ethics advance your form of Christianity?

Dozie: "And, why are you interested in Catholic sexual ethics in the first place? How do Catholic sexual ethics advance your form of Christianity?"

Observing the Catholic Church's problems with pedophile priests, gay priests, fornicating priests which may be partially or significantly related to clerical celibacy is potentially instructive for Protestants.

Observing Catholic problems with Church teaching on sexual ethics ideally helps Protestants to avoid the terrible scandal and huge expense that the Catholic Church has wrought upon itself.

I should also add that it's instructive to watch Catholics such as yourself react badly when folks learn about sexual misconduct among Catholic priests.

You throw stones at folks who are merely holding up a mirror of Catholic malfeasance. It's like you're upset that someone has the audacity to shine the light upon Catholic darkness and expose it. Why not get upset at the Catholic darkness instead of being upset at the folks who are helpfully shining the light? Why not own up and acknowledge your Church's shortcomings instead of becoming unpleasantly defensive?

Observing your lack of maturity is instructive, and I do hope it's not indicative of all Catholics.

scotju: "Truth, are you serious, quoting an apostate priest as an authority, one who is a gay too?"

I am not quoting him as an "authority"; I am merely quoting him for his personal observations. If you disagree with his observations and experiences in Catholic seminary and as a Catholic priest, that's up to you.

"So, the solution is repentance, Truth, not getting married in a vain attempt to show, hey I'm not queer, (a lot of sodomites do it) or to mastubate to "relieve" sexual tensions."

I don't know what you're arguing about. The issue is misconduct by non-celibate Catholic priests. If these non-celibate priests don't repent, then what is the Catholic Church going to do? Isn't that the current situation now? A bunch of unrepentant non-celibate Catholic priests and the Church doesn't know what to do, if anything. Other than to pay out large sums of money and to apologize to victims and their families. And to continue watching spiritual damage being done to the Catholic flock. I have read accounts of some folks who are so disappointed in the Catholic Church that they are no longer going to mass. How about that? Your solution to all this is that these bad priests should repent. Sounds good. But what if they don't? Then what?

"Don't you know most sodomites are compulsive masturbators?"

I didn't know that. Are they sodomites because they're compulsive masturbators? So like, if you can get these folks to stop masturbating, then they'll stop practicing sodomy?

I suspected you would rather rant than answer specific questions on an issue you raised. According to your own principles, Protestantism has no reason to look to the Catholic Church for anything. Everything is figured out for you per sola scriptura. Attempting to learn from the "failures" of the Catholic Church is to admit that sola scriptura is an inadequate guide for building and sustaining a “christian” communion (a fact you should not admit). So again, you play games with the real reasons you are interested in Catholic sexual ethics.

I should also add that it's instructive to watch Catholics such as yourself react badly when folks learn about sexual misconduct among Catholic priests.

Why not own up and acknowledge your Church's shortcomings instead of becoming unpleasantly defensive?

Why does shining the light make you unpleasantly defensive and make you want to run away from the light?

It's like you'd rather shoot out the light than to look upon what the light is shining on in the Catholic Church. In this case, non-celibate Catholic priests and a Catholic hierarchy who are causing terrible scandal and a huge expense to the Catholic Church.

"In this case, non-celibate Catholic priests and a Catholic hierarchy who are causing terrible scandal and a huge expense to the Catholic Church."

Do not try to run away from your own “self-examination”. I am pressing you on the issue of masturbation which you seem to think is ok for Protestants. Can you confirm or deny that masturbation is ok. This should be easy for any honest person to answer. What is instructive is how quick you are to jubilate at the failures of some Catholics but you are frightened to examine your own practices or even speak generally whether masturbation, which you brought up, is a sin or not.

Truth, it's obvisious you have no understanding of sexual addiction or compulsion. You persist in claiming that allowing priests who are queer or sexually fustratsed should be allowed to marry or masturbate. As I've already pointed out, mastrubation (or any sexual behavior) is complusive among sodomites and other sex addicts. That complusion is fed by pornography and other repeated acts of sexual misconduct. The only thing that can help a sex addict, wheather he's a priest under vows of celibacy, a married or a single man (or woman) is to stop acting out. Any doctor or therapist who treats sex addictions/complusions will tell you that. Then he/she has to start dealing with the emotional traumas that drove this type of behavior. But until the sexual acting out stops, no healing is possible. This is why your suggestion is so stupid and dangerous. It would be a death sentence for these people. Please Truth, google the web for some information on sexual addiction and edcate yourself so you don't misinform yourself and others about this subject.

Have you folks ever read and considered the substance of what Steve Hays has written:

"Whether or not masturbation is immoral is the very issue in dispute. It’s moral status is an issue which needs to be argued, not assumed. And this is an issue which confronts every teenage boy, so it merits a serious and respectful analysis.

This is one reason, though not the only one, why the Catholic church has so many sex scandals. The inability to have an adult discussion of human sexuality.

i) Among other problems, the Roman church is the victim of its own legalism. Legalism treats innocent or debatable practices as if they were guilty practices.

The inevitable result of legalism is to precipitate the very thing it fears. By creating a list of pseudo-sins, it ends up fostering reactionary types of genuine immorality that are worse than anything it was trying to avoid in the first place.

ii) The Roman church suffers from a number of sexual hang-ups. This is reflected on such issues as “artificial” contraception [a practice that Calvin and Luther deplored], clerical celibacy [urged by Jesus (Mt 19:10-12) and Paul (1 Cor 7:7-8, 17, 32-35, 38) for those who are called to it], and the perpetual virginity of Mary [a belief accepted by Calvin, Luther, and many other "Reformers"] – including the Gnostic/Docetic refinement of her virginity in partu.

By fixating on pseudo-sins, by treating what is innocent or natural as if it were guilty, the end-result is to engender aggravated forms of immorality.

Yet these aggravated sins don’t bother them nearly as much as the pseudo-sins.

Yes, the church of Rome condemns sexual abuse the way the Mafia condemns organized crime. It “condemns” sexual abuse by shielding abusive priests. By shielding complicit bishops. It’s says a lot about the Catholic concept of morality that they think what an institution says on paper is all that matters–regardless of how it actually conducts business."

As I mentioned to Dozie before:

Observing Catholic problems with Church teaching on sexual ethics ideally helps Protestants to avoid the terrible scandal and huge expense that the Catholic Church has wrought upon itself.

Sowing Magisterial legalism on some sexual matters has caused the Roman Catholic Church to reap some very expensive and scandalous expenses. Protestants observe the horrific damage that the Catholic Church has reaped from sowing its harsh legalism. This is very beneficial for Protestants to learn what not to do. At least your very expensive and damaging corporate sin shows Christians what to avoid.

Truth, you are oblivious to the truth. You can't seem to get it through your head that allowing priests to marry or allowing them to practise auto-eroticism isn't going to solve the problem of sexual misconduct in the priesthood. As I have already explained, sodomy is a compulsive behaviour. The people who practise this behaviour are compelled to act out even if it puts them in danger of exposure, humilation, illness, or death. To give or to sanction two new outlets for sex while they're in the grip of this soul-damning addiction would only give them more opportunities for sex. Queers universally practise auto-eroticism, so you would just be giving them permission to do what they have always done. Marriage would just be used as a cover up for sodomy by these kind of people, so if the soddy is accused of unnatural vice, he (and his supporters)can say "Hey ,I'm (he's) a married man". They have always used this as a dodge in the past, and there's no reason they wouldn't use it again.

As Ben M said "Celebacy is not the problem", it's the refusel of people in the clerical and lay state to practise self-control. Please tell Mr HAYS THAT. state

Did you even read my comment? Your comment doesn't even address what was written, and I even boldfaced it for you.

For charity's sake, read the following and interact with it:

"Among other problems, the Roman church is the victim of its own legalism. Legalism treats innocent or debatable practices as if they were guilty practices.

The inevitable result of legalism is to precipitate the very thing it fears. By creating a list of pseudo-sins, it ends up fostering reactionary types of genuine immorality that are worse than anything it was trying to avoid in the first place.

By fixating on pseudo-sins, by treating what is innocent or natural as if it were guilty, the end-result is to engender aggravated forms of immorality."

scotju: "it's the refusal of people in the clerical and lay state to practise self-control. Please tell Mr HAYS THAT."

Okay. The following interacts with your statement above regarding how or why many lay Catholics and Catholic clergy are refusing to practice self-control:

"Among other problems, the Roman church is the victim of its own legalism. Legalism treats innocent or debatable practices as if they were guilty practices.

The inevitable result of legalism is to precipitate the very thing it fears. By creating a list of pseudo-sins, it ends up fostering reactionary types of genuine immorality that are worse than anything it was trying to avoid in the first place.

By fixating on pseudo-sins, by treating what is innocent or natural as if it were guilty, the end-result is to engender aggravated forms of immorality."

An honest Catholic says: Celibacy is a problem for the pope because it is a fundamental means of controlling a homo-social clergy and also in practice it is not a well-observed discipline.

Celibacy is the requirement that a man promise or vow “perfect and perpetual chastity” before he can be ordained a priest. The subject has been in dispute and disrepute for centuries. Mandated celibacy of clerics has vital connections with the problem of sexual abuse of minors within the clerical system. It is not a neutral psychosexual element.

Clerical culture provides fertile ground for the abuse of power and privilege. Celibate practice lags far behind the ideal of perfect and perpetual chastity.

At any one time no more than fifty percent of priests are practicing celibacy. Some men within this circle of influence and atmosphere will inevitably become abusers. History has proven it.

Secrecy (the scarlet bond) within the Catholic clerical system is the cornerstone of the social construct of clerical celibacy and its violation. The reverence accorded sacramental confession is stretched beyond all reason to cover and justify known clerical sexual violations and liaisons.

Mandated celibacy is the capstone of clerical power. The power structure of the Catholic clerical elite has done all it could to keep the abuse of minors a secret and to deflect blame outward. The fight to protect the power system persists in the church’s violent and irrational opposition against the dissolution of statute of limitations for crimes of abuse.

Clergy simply are not taught celibacy. The religious system is deficient and inadequate to meet the demands of celibate/sexual knowledge and practice today. The seminary system established at Trent (1543-65) wherein the monastic-like daily schedule and the mentorship of a spiritual director were intended to form the man in celibate commitment is no longer serviceable.

The faculties are not psychosexually mature enough, and at times even lax and seductive. The demands of modern ministry are beyond the scope of anything offered in any seminary. Jesuit John L. Thomas said that a priest should know everything there is to know about sexuality short of experience.

Beyond those deficiencies are the crippling effects of sexual doctrine and discipline that are not credible. The seminary system sets men up to lead double lives or worse to develop sociopathic personalities that adapt and operate well in the clerical power structure.

------

The Voice Of The Faithful organized “to support the sexually abused; to support priests and bishops of integrity; and to help shape the structural integrity of the Church.” VOTF spread from Boston across the country.

Secular authorities neither in Boston nor across the country were mollified; in 12 jurisdictions from Massachusetts to Los Angeles civil officials instituted Grand Jury investigations to evaluate the pattern and practice of the Roman Catholic Church in dealing with sex abuse of minors by its clergy. Every one found the bishops negligent or complicit in a problem they “could not manage.”

CONCLUSION: The Roman Catholic Church today is corrupt sexually and financially.

The symptom of sexual abuse of minors by clergy rests on foundations that tremble or will crumble when external examination or exposure penetrate them. The devious way the U.S. bishops have reacted to the crisis begins a process of exposure that cannot be reversed, contained or denied.

The problem is now in the pope’s hands.

Only a sexual Copernican shift that will reconsider basic assumptions about sexual teaching and discipline that affect all Catholics will be sufficient to meet the basic crisis that now inundates us."

Ah, Truth, sure I read your statement. It's the same inane, mindless tripe you have been posting since this farce began.

Legelism is not the problem, Truther. The real problems that caused the problem was the lack of self-control, caused by neglecting their spiritual life by the individals involved and lack of doctrinal and moral discipline by church authorities when problems flared up. In other words, lawlessness.

An "honest Catholic?" Give me a break, son! Sipe is a typical liberal who thinks watering down church doctrine is just great. I went to his site and found it full of the usual liberal-leftist twaddle. He supports things like recovred memories and gay rights, and I'm supposed to believe he's an "honest Catholic", right? Wrrrong, Truthee, wrong! He a dishonest dissenter who should have been given the blessing of the boot years ago. And the fact that he's a laicized priest doesn't impress me either.

Scotju: "lack of doctrinal and moral discipline by church authorities when problems flared up."

You finally owned up to the obvious.

I'm glad to see that you agree with Richard Sipe who wrote:

"...in 12 jurisdictions from Massachusetts to Los Angeles civil officials instituted Grand Jury investigations to evaluate the pattern and practice of the Roman Catholic Church in dealing with sex abuse of minors by its clergy. Every one found the bishops negligent or complicit in a problem they “could not manage.”

The symptom of sexual abuse of minors by clergy rests on foundations that tremble or will crumble when external examination or exposure penetrate them. The devious way the U.S. bishops have reacted to the crisis begins a process of exposure that cannot be reversed, contained or denied."

Truth, I've always said that the bishops failed to exercise proper discipline. You were claiming that our rules and laws(or legelism as you mistakingly called it) was the problem.

Me agree with Sipes!? LOL! He a freaking liberal-leftist! He works with radical groups that want to subvert and pervert the church like the queers want to do. The only reason he cares about the queer priest scandal is that their seduction/rape of children will draw attention to the the way the larger sodomite community gets it's recruits. That's the real reason why the queer community is "against" pedeophilla. They'll dry up without new blood.

Truth, Sipes may "worship" in the same Catholic church I do, but his worship is in vain because he wants 'his' Catholicism, not the Church's Catholicism.

If he "wants to reduce priestly misconduct" he ought to stop giving aid and support to liberal, dissenting groups VOTF and SNAP who's real aim is to change the church's beliefs, not to stop priest's from behaving badly.

Excerpt: “The Rev. Gerald Fitzgerald, who founded a Roman Catholic religious order that helped troubled priests, began warning American bishops in the early 1950s that pedophile priests couldn’t be cured. So sure was he that he made a $5,000 down payment on a Caribbean island to quarantine the worst offenders.

Yet it wasn’t until 2002 that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops adopted a zero-tolerance policy requiring that any priest who has engaged in sexual abuse of a minor be reported to authorities and permanently removed from ministry. The crisis has cost American dioceses more than $2.6 billion in settlements and fees since 1950.

Some reform-minded Catholics have suggested that required celibacy contributed to the problem, causing priests to exploit minors for sexual gratification. Some traditional Catholics say the Second Vatican Council’s window-opening reforms led to relaxed enforcement of old church rules that would have kept priests in line.

But church leaders on both sides have agreed on at least one of reasons that clergymen known to be offenders were able to continue their pattern of abuse: an over-reliance on psychologists who advised bishops that perpetrators could be treated and returned to parish ministry.

The report also blames bishops for withholding damaging information about troubled priests from psychiatrists and seeking out lenient treatment centers.

Media coverage of the sex-abuse scandals has focused on those bishops who protected offenders from criminal prosecution, shuffling them around from parish to parish. But in replacing theology with psychiatry, these church leaders also lost sight of the pastoral tools that could have encouraged abusers to confront the harm they’ve caused their victims.

At a Mass in Rome April 15, Pope Benedict XVI preached on the Book of Acts, chapter 5, which discusses repentance and forgiveness of sins.

“I have to say that we Christians, even in recent times, have often avoided the word repentance, which seems too harsh,” he explained. “Now, under the attacks of the world, which speaks to us of our sins, we see that the ability to repent is a grace, and we see how it is necessary to repent, that is, to recognize what is wrong in our life.”“

It’s so good that Pope Benedict XVI acknowledges and confesses the Roman Catholic Church’s sin in this terrible scandal and is repenting of the institutional and corporate sin of the Catholic Church that has caused so much grief and pain and suffering for the victims and their families that came from pedophile Catholic priests or sodomite Catholic priests or fornicating Catholic priests.

"He that has ever so little examined the citations of writers cannot doubt how little credit the quotations deserve when the originals are wanting"

xx

Looking for an Obscure Luther Quote?Chances are if you've wound up on this site, you're looking for information on an obscure quote said to come from Martin Luther or one of the other Protestant Reformers. This blog has been compiling information on obscure Reformation quotes for over a decade. Use the search engines below to look for your particular obscure quote.

Search Beggars All #1

Search Beggars All #2

Recent Comments

“Let nobody suppose that he has tasted the Holy Scriptures sufficiently unless he has ruled over the churches with the prophets for a hundred years. Therefore there is something wonderful, first, about John the Baptist; second, about Christ; third, about the apostles...“We are beggars. That is true.” - Martin Luther

"It is true that the best apologetics can be given only when the system of truth is well known. But it is also true that the system of truth is not well known except it be seen in its opposition to error."- Cornelius Van Til

"But a most pernicious error widely prevails that Scripture has only so much weight as is conceded to it by the consent of the church. As if the eternal and inviolable truth of God depended upon the decision of men!"- John Calvin

"The Scriptures obtain full authority among believers only when men regard them as having sprung from heaven, as if there the living words of God were heard."- John Calvin

Currently on my Shelf...

Find new books and literate friends with Shelfari, the online book club.

This is the best book available on Sola Scriptura. For Protestants, it will help you understand and defend sola scriptura. For Catholics, this book will help you understand exactly what Protestants mean by sola scriptura, rather than what you think it means. I highly recommend getting this book, it never leaves my desk, and serves as a valuable reference tool.